Amit Chopra vs D/o Post

1



CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH


ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.362/2020

PRONOUNCED ON: 21.08.2026
RESERVED ON: 07.08.2026

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)


Amit Chopra, Aged 30 years, S/O Late Sh. Anil Chopra, Ex. Ρ.Α.,
0/0 Sr. Supdt. Of Post Offices, Ambala Division, Ambala, Resident
of House No.54, Adarsh Nagar, Model Town, Ambala City.
…. Applicant

(By Advocate: Sh. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Advocate along with Sh.
Sandeep Siwatch).

Versus

1. Union of India through Secretary to Government of India,
Ministry of Communication & Information Technology,
Department of Post, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
2. Reviewing Authority (Hon'ble President of India), Govt. of
India, Ministry of Communication & Information Technology,
Department of Post, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
3. Chief Post Master General, Haryana Circle, Ambala-134003.
4. Superintendent of Post Offices, Ambala Division, Ambala.

…. Respondents
(By Advocate: Sh. K.K. Thakur).

DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

2



O R D E R
PER: MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)
1. Present original application has been filed by the applicant
under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985,
seeking following relief:-
i. Quash memo dated 23.05.2017, passed by Respondent
No.4 (Annexure A-1), whereby applicant has been
awarded punishment of dismissal from service by the
incompetent authority i.e. Adhoc.
ii. Quash memo no. Staff/1-4/13/2017 dated 09.05.2018,
passed by Respondent No.3 (Annexure A-2), whereby
revision petition filed by the applicant has been rejected
by relying upon the same grounds which have been relied
upon by the incompetent Disc. Authority while passing the
order dated 23.05.2017.
iii. Quash Order No.C-17015/16/2019-VP dated
19.02.2020 (Annexure A-3), passed by Respondent No.2,
whereby Review Petition filed by the applicant was
rejected admitting that the officer who awarded
punishment was working in JTS cadre on adhoc basis.
iv. Quash the charge sheet dated 18.02.2015 (Annexure
A-4) whereby the illegal allegations were levelled against
the applicant by the incompetent authority, appointment
of Enquiry Officer by incompetent authority and Inquiry
Report dated 19.01.2017 (Annexure A-4/A), whereby the
illegal allegations were proved against the applicant by
the inquiry officer without going through the statement
made by the witnesses & documents.
v. Direct the respondents after setting aside the
Impugned Orders (A-1 to A-4/A) to treat the applicant in
service with all consequential benefits and/or for the grant
of any other relief (s) which the applicant to may be found
entitled to under the rules and law.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are as follows. The
applicant was appointed as Postal Assistant by the SSPO
Ambala vide appointment order dated 18.01.2011. While
working as Postal Assistant, Model Town Ambala City
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

3



applicant was involved in a false disciplinary case at the
behest of the vested interests and was served with a memo
(major charge sheet) dated 18.02.2015 (served upon
the applicant on 24.02.2015) under Rule 14 of CCS
(CCA) Rules, 1965. Applicant filed representation dated
18.03.2015 against the Charges and denied the charges
leveled against him. After receiving the representation of
the applicant, Sh. Ram Nath, ASPOs, Yamunanagar was
appointed as inquiring authority vide memo dated
24.03.2015 to enquire into the article of charges and IO
and PO were also appointed by a Junior Officer. During the
course of Inquiry the evidences of 7 witnesses were
recorded. The Inquiry Officer submitted his Inquiry report
dated 19.01.2017 and proved the charges against the
applicant. Disciplinary Authority supplied the Inquiry
Report to the applicant vide Office letter dated
23.02.2017 for submitting his defence/
representation , but the applicant could not submit the
same due to unavoidable family circumstances. The
Disciplinary Authority vide Memo dated 23.05.2017
dismissed the applicant from service with immediate
effect without appreciating the material available on
the record and dismissal order was passed by the
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

4



person working on adhoc basis . The applicant could not
submit appeal against the dismissal order due to
unavoidable circumstances.
3. However, he submitted petition dated 04.09.2017 under
Rule 29 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, for revision of
punishment order, directly to the respondent No.3, by
stating the reasons that the charges are not proved against
the applicant in view of the statement/deposition given the
witnesses. The respondent No.3 vide memo dated
09.05.2018 rejected the petition of the applicant and
upheld the order of Disciplinary authority i.e.
dismissal from service.
4. In the month of July, 2018 applicant came to know that the
Disciplinary Authority which passed the dismissal orders
was not the competent being only adhoc appointee.
Applicant submitted RTI application dated 12.07.2018 to
CPIO of respondent No.3 and sought order vide which
Disciplinary authority i.e. Sh. J.K. Gulati was promoted to
the post of SSPO Ambala on adhoc basis and whether
Disciplinary Authority was promoted on regular basis or
not. CPIO Office of Respondent No.3 provided the
requisite information and also provided the
promotion order of Sh. J.K. Gulati (vide which he was
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

5



promoted on adhoc basis) and also informed that he has
not been promoted on regular basis yet. Sh. J.K. Gulati
worked on adhoc basis Class-I Officer from 27.01.2017 to
30.06.2017 and from 03.07.2017 to 26.06.2018 only. The
aforementioned information under RTI shows that the
applicant was issued a charge sheet/memo dated
18.02.2015 by a Group 'B' Officer. After receiving the
information provided by the CPIO of office of respondent
No.3, applicant submitted review petition before the
respondent No.2 dated 01.10.2018 under Rule 29A of CCS
(CCA) Rules 1965 for review of order dated 23.05.2017
passed by the Disciplinary Authority who is incompetent to
pass any order against the applicant and order dated
09.05.2018 passed by the CPMG, Haryana. After receiving
the review petition of the applicant, reviewing authority
issued letter dated 04.02.2019 and directed the CPMG,
Haryana Circle, Ambala to arrange the brief history of the
case, parawise comments and case records alongwith the
review petition so that necessary action could be taken.
The applicant was also informed by office of respondent
No.4 while forwarding the documents to respondent No.3
and also intimated the status of the case to the applicant
vide letter dated 08.02.2019
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

6



5. Applicant approached this Tribunal by filing O.A.
No.060/01195/2019 seeking quashing of impugned orders
A-1 to A-4 and seeking consequential benefits or in the
alternative seeking directions to the Reviewing Authority to
decide Review Petition. The O.A. was disposed of by this
Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dated 20.11.2019 directing the
Reviewing Authority to consider and decide the Review
Petition while considering all the grounds taken therein,
expeditiously but not later than two months, in any case.
Reviewing Authority without considering the issue of
competency of Disciplinary Authority rejected the
Review Petition filed by the applicant reiterating that
both the authorities i.e. Appointing Authority as well
as the officer who awarded punishment to the
applicant was working as JTS on adhoc basis, vide
order 19.02.2020 received on 6.3.2020. Hence the
present Original Application.
6. Respondents have filed written statement on 28.08.2020
submitting therein that after matter came to light, inquiry
was conducted through Sub Divisional in charge of Ambala
City Sub Division and misappropriation of an amount of
Rs.2,75,000 (Annexure R-1) come into light, which was
done by the applicant. Accordingly he was proceeded
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

7



against under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide
memo dated 18.02.15, Superintendent of Post Offices,
Ambala Division, Ambala (Annexure A-4). The applicant
denied charges vide application dated 18.03.2015
(Annexure A-7). Accordingly, Inquiry Officer and Presiding
Officer were appointed to inquire into charge vide SPO
Ambala division memo dated 24.03.2015 (Annexure A-8).
Inquiry report was given to applicant on 23.07.2017
(Annexure R-4/A) . There was no response from
applicant to letters dated 30.03.2017 and 19.04.2017, sent
to him to submit defence. When no response was received
despite giving opportunity, case was decided by SSPO
Ambala Division on 23.05.2017 (Annexure A-1). The
orders were passed by the competent authority with
due application of mind as per Rule 13(2) of CCS
(CCA) Rules, 1965 (Annexure R-4) which stipulates that
a disciplinary authority competent under these rules to
impose any one of the penalties specified under Clauses (i)
to (iv) of Rule 11 may institute disciplinary proceedings
against any Government Servant for the imposition of any
of the penalties specified in Clauses (v) to (ix) of Rules 11,
notwithstanding that such Disciplinary Authority is not
competent under these Rules to impose any of the later
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

8



penalties. Hence the Memo of charge was issued as per
rules. Sh. J.K. Gulati was permanently holding the
charge of SSPO Ambala on adhoc basis, and the
officer working on adhoc basis is fully competent to
exercise all the statutory powers, whether those
powers are derived direct from an Act of Parliament
or Rules, Regulations and By-Law made under
various Articles of the Constitution , which was rightly
observed by Reviewing Authority while passing the order or
review petition. Moreover the appointment of applicant was
done by adhoc SSPO and the penalty has also been
imposed by Adhoc SSPO. Thus in nutshell, no fault can be
seen in passing of the impugned orders.
7. According to respondents, applicant preferred petition
dated 04.09.2017 (Annexure A-9) directly to CPMG,
Haryana Circle, Ambala and the same was rejected by
competent authority i.e. CPMG vide memo dated
09.05.2018 (Annexure A-2). Thereafter, review petition
was address to President of India dated 01.10.2018
(Annexure A-2) was rejected by Director VP, Postal
Directorate, New Delhi on behalf of President vide memo
dated 19.02.2020 (Annexure A-3). The applicant was
appointed by Sh. S.K. Sharma on 27.01.2011, who was
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

9



working as SSPO Ambala on adhoc basis at that time as per
order dated 15.09.2010 (Annexure R-3). Hence the Memo
of charge as well as order of appointment of I.O. and P.O.
was issued as per rules. The charge sheet (Annexure A-4)
was issued to the applicant by Sh. J. K. Gulati, when he
was working as SSPO Ambala (as Group 'A' officer) and
Punishment orders (Annexure A-1) were issued by Sh. J.K.
Gulati on 23.05.2017 (Annexure R-3 colly) while he was
working as SSPOs Ambala on adhoc basis. He was
competent to appoint the applicant being appointing
authority, and issue orders of training and posting as per
powers of divisional head vested in the rules and there is
no irregularity in the appointment of the applicant.
8. It is further stated by respondents that the quantum of
punishment in a disciplinary case is within the domain of
the competent disciplinary authorities. If the penalty can
lawfully be imposed and is imposed on the proved
misconduct, court of law has no power to substitute its
discretion for that of the authority. The adequacy of
penalty unless it is mala fide is certainly not a matter
for courts to concern with . The respondents have
submitted that the charges established against the
applicant constitute misconduct on his part. Accordingly the
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

10



action of the disciplinary authority in imposing the aforesaid
penalty on the applicant is in order and as per law and the
applicant has no cause of action against the said order. In
this context, respondents have relied upon decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India and Ors. vs.
Himmat Singh Chahar AIR 1999 SC 1980 as also in the
case of Apparel Export Promotion Council V.A.K. Chopra
AIR 1999 SC 625.
9. We have perused facts on record. The issue is whether
C.S. was issued by competent authority or not .
Applicant has relied upon decision of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Union of India and others vs. B.V.
Gopinath 2013 (4) SCT 507 hence sought quashing of
orders dated 23.05.2017 (A/1) and also 09.05.2018 (A//2).
We have also seen replication filed on 24.44.2020 by
applicant wherein applicant has vehemently denied the
charges against him pointing out to his absence from office
on days misconduct is attributed to him. Further neither in
chargesheet nor in impugned orders A/1 and A/2 there is
reference to misappropriation of Rs.2,75,000/- in 27 bank
accounts, whereas allegation is misappropriation of
Rs.60000/- in 5 accounts. He has elaborated upon adverse
family circumstances relating to grandparents hence why
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

11



he could not represent in time and finally preferred revision
petition on 4.9.2017.
10. We find merit in the contention of applicant that Appointing
Authority of the Postal Assistant is SSPO and if the person
working on adhoc basis has signed appointment order that
does not mean that the adhoc authority can also exercise
the powers of punishment as Disciplinary Authority. Any
order passed by the incompetent authority are void-ab-
initio and liable to be quashed. Under CCS (CCA) Rules
1965 adhoc authority cannot exercise statutory power.
11. Further we find, in the present case respondents are
alleging in para 4 (supra) of written statement total
misappropriation of Rs.2,75,000/-, in 27 accounts
(Annexure R-1) whereas article I of charge-sheet against
the applicant for misappropriation of Rs.66000/- in 05
accounts. Apart from this discrepancy, the applicant has
not been given opportunity for explaining his stand for the
remaining 22 accounts. Thus action of the respondents is in
violation of principles of natural justice. It is well settled law
as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Krishan Lal
Versus State of Jammu & Kashmir reported as (1994) 27
ATC 594 that any order in violation of the principles of
natural justice is a nullity.
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

12



12. We have perused Rule 43 of P&T Manual Volume III as per
which no major penalty can be imposed by an authority
lower than appointing authority . Applicant was appointed
as Postal Assistant by SSPO Ambala S.k. Sharma, working
in JTS cadre on adhoc basis, w.e.f. 24.01.2011 (A-17)
against direct quota. These orders were issued in partial
modification of office memo dated 18.1.2011 (Annexure A-
5). Major penalty of dismissal was imposed on 23.05.2017
by Disciplinary authority SSPO Ambala, who was at JTS
level but again adhoc appointee. We have examined Rule
13 relating to authority competent to impose penalty as
also content of order dated 19.02.2020 (Annexure A-3)
issued by vigilance department. Both appellate authority SK
Sharma and authority awarding punishment JK Gupta were
working as JTS on relevant dates on adhoc basis were not
regular Gr. A officers while appointment is a beneficial
action dismissal is penal action and must be taken by
competent authority only. As per note below Rule 43 of
Postal Manual Vol.III:-
“Under the provision of sub-rule(2) of Rule 12 of the Central Civil
Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rule, 1965 the
prescribed appointing authorities are competent to impose all the
statutory penalties. In the schedule to these rules while powers of
appointment in respect of certain Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ cadres have
been delegated to non-gazetted officers like Inspectors of Post
Offices, Head Record Officer etc. they have not, however, been
delegated with the powers to impose any of the major penalties.
By virtue of this limitation of their powers in the schedule in this
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI

13



respect these appointing authorities are precluded from exercising
power of imposing penalty.

T is clear, regularly appointed authorities have full power to
take action but not adhoc as note does not empower adhoc
authority to take disciplinary action. In our view dismissal
from service being a disciplinary action and a major penalty
cannot be imposed by adhoc appointee not promoted on
regular basis as Gr. A as after expiry of such promotion
period on adhoc appointee is liable to go back to old Gr. B
post, unless promoted to Gr. A.
13. Therefore, the issue is whether authority promoted to Gr. A
on adhoc basis can impose penalty of dismissal? The question
is answered in favour of applicant relying on Hon’ble Supreme
Court decision in the case of B.V. Gopinath (supra). In the
facts of this case, the laws relied upon by the respondents are
not applicable.
14. Accordingly, Annexure A-1 and A-2 are quashed and set
aside. However, competent authority, if he finds it prudent,
can take action as necessary based on facts and law
regarding ‘misconduct’ of the applicant. However, any such
action if taken, must be completed within 6 months from date
of issue of this order. Subject to above, the OA is allowed.
No costs.
(RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI) ( SURESH KUMAR BATRA )
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/kr/
DN: C=IN, S=Haryana, Phone=
10d7987dd4a8aacfad9360ba903bda3f4c8af2ad599ef7f
95112c485da704d31, PostalCode=134116, STREET=
DO Chandan Singh HOUSE No1262 First Floor
Sector19 Panchkula, OID.2.5.4.65=
KAMLA 1440e9763d5e4f52bef95c81dbcf9f5b, T=0038,
SERIALNUMBER=
a8020b659a8c3d8f8edf96aa669156e2b571c782ec572
4add6afa6fcaed8e465, O=Personal, CN=KAMLA DEVI Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.09.02 11:16:41+05'30'
DEVI